And the warden knows that not all contraband is the same. But, still, you can't have the image that the rules aren't being enforced at all.
The gambling & porn apps will get a new EAC and move their users over; it's the hassle that they should have been planning for. Two of the apps in the article's table have multiple web presences, suggesting that some have planned for it.
For Facebook & Google, it's a PR issue. Apple may have scored points with the public for putting out this "we're protecting you against the big guys" story. It would look unseemly for Facebook or Google to directly point out the other contraband in Apple's jail -- nobody like a snitch.
But then the articles and commentary will come from people with ties to Facebook or Google, such as someone who "was the Lead Writer of Inside Facebook,... covering everything about the social network", that "has moderated over 120 on-stage interviews" but lists only three: Edward Snowden, U,S, Senator Cory Booker, and Mark Zuckerberg.
jez9999, first of all do you know of a TV that has a USB-C port on it? I haven't seen any of those beasts yet, but it will happen someday.
Second, not all USB-C ports are the same. Some USB-C ports only support USB protocols, while others can support Thunderbolt and/or video. So you'd need video support on both sides of the connection; the computer side is likely to be common either as raw video or a USB video device, but again it's about finding the TV with the support for video over USB-C...
HDMI can't supply power, but MHL can. Mobile High-Definition Link (MHL) can (but is not required to) provide power back to the video source from the TV, and a lot of TVs already support MHL. MHL can use either a USB Micro B connector or an HDMI connector, so maybe you should be looking for a solution with an MHL-enabled TV adapter?
The big issue I see in my daily work life is that management acts as if using a third-party solution, be it proprietary or open-source, means we will receive perfect code at the beginning and never have to update it. We lock versions early in the dev cycle, but if a new version comes out mid-development there is a general distrust of changing to the new one.
And then, when the inevitable critical issue is discovered after we have release, we have no efficient plan on how to update. At least GPL solves that; when users have a pure-GPL system, they can always recompile/relink everything themselves after the big patch. But if I statically link a proprietary license library into our proprietary product, we have to step in and rebuild to get the fix out there. And the lack of preparation for this process does endanger security.
The management teams I've worked with are typically better at estimating and preparing for critical field breaks in "our" code. But that's why they like third-party, and that assumption of "perfect" that makes the future look so much better. So the bigger issue is that managers endanger secure software development.
And what about on the Democratic side?... Their level of delusion seems a little worse than your average Trump voter.
Hammer, meet nail. It wasn't just the Trump side that was "misinformed" by Facebook; Clinton's supporters were equally in a bubble. "Fake" news did not impact only one side; it touched every single candidate. It was near propaganda levels, especially in the final week. Ad hominem was the normal response of the Clinton side; why rebut the argument when it's easier to attack the speaker. Straw man was the normal response of the Trump side; why respond to the actual argument when you can misrepresent it and have a slam-dunk rebuttal.
Maybe it's time for Facebook to realize that all their "algorithms" will be exploitable, and they should just go back to a perfect, unaltered timeline of everything a user is following. At least that way we can say it's the people choosing to be misinformed and not just a side-effect of an algorithmic choice.
I agree with this, but mostly because not all Computer Science programs are the same. I've interviewed a lot of people for development jobs (embedded systems and device drivers), and have been appalled by what passes as a Computer Science education from some schools. If anyone is in a program that makes them question it's value, then you might want to transfer to a school with a better Computer Science program!
Also, take advantage of internship and cooperative education opportunities while you're getting your degree. Putting your skills to use as you learn can help you refine your skills while you finish your degree.
One could argue that in order to test such a product, they must have installed OS X, which requires them to "accept" this EULA which they promptly violated by installing on a PC.
But what if they bought a Mac Pro and then replaced the guts with other components? Is the resulting computer still Apple-labeled? What if they have an Apple logo sticker that they stick on the case? Is that Apple-labeled?
In the beginning, there were a lot more ads on satellite radio. One of the two companies (I forget which) decided to focus on ad-free music channels; amazingly, the other company reduced the number of channels with ads as well.
Post-merger, I'm concerned that Big Satellite (B.S.) will finally take aim at the terrestrial market. With only one satellite service type, how long until we see automobiles that come with a free B.S. receiver but the terrestrial receiver (AM/FM) costs extra?
To me, though, it comes down to the apparent difference between Republican and Democratic oversight: Republicans reject regulations unless a direct fault can be seen (well, satellite competes with terrestrial, so it's not a monopoly) whereas Democrats demand regulations unless a direct fault can be guaranteed not to happen (well, they could become a monopoly, so forbid them from merging).
I'm curious how much the FCC could "change" this decision in a year, should the executive branch return to Democratic hands.
[Powell] tried to prevent the war, but there's only so much he could do.
He could have refused to make the comments, resigned, and forced the Administration to send someone else to be their stooge. The fact that the option would have cost him his job does not mean that Powell did not have an option.
Any material created by a Representative in their official role of Representative is the property of the United States of America, and the Capuano letter (the 'source' for this article) states that they want to EXPAND the sites onto which this USA-owned material may be posted. Currently, Representatives may only post this material to pages under House.gov, but they want to allow 'outside channels' to enable functions that House.gov can't serve effectively, such as streaming video.
This is no where close to the "barring any member of Congress from posting opinions on any internet site without first obtaining prior approval from the Democratic leadership" meme that the submitter (selil) introduced. In fact, the entire activity here appears (again, from the Capuano letter) to be RELAXING the rules on where content may be posted.
Original article: -1, Troll.
one has to wonder if Cisco lost any sales to small-to-medium businesses over it.
If an SMB customer is willing to install a 3rd-party firmware on a Linksys device to get more features for less coin, I doubt that customer would have considered a Cisco product in the first place. In that case, it seems Cisco could be making a little money through the consumer hardware sale instead of no money through no hardware sale.
But forcing the rightful owner to actually buy something back that belongs to him already feels completely wrong to me.
The rightful owner isn't "buing back" anything; the people who purchased the stolen goods may not be able to "return" their goods nor (AFAIK) can they sue the seller for selling them stolen goods. IANAL, but it seems that only the rightful owner can get restitution from the theif. That restitution may be the cash the theif received for the stolen goods, and the rightful owner can then "buy" their items back by returning the money that was paid for the stolen goods.
In the end, the rightful owner is "buying back" their property, but they're (ideally) using money recovered from the theif and not their own cash. The rightful owner could also choose to use their own money in advance of restitution from the theif, or may just use their own money because recovering from the theif would be a net loss.
And requiring a 100 dollar a month contract minimum is an absolute deal killer.
Service plans for the iPhone start at $59.99/mo, which is $39.99 for the voice line and $20 for data. I added another iPhone for my wife for another $20 (data plan).
If you want to point out an error in his published research, go right ahead and try. Otherwise, drop with the insinuations and innuendo.
When they open up that published reserach so that it can be fully reviewed, we could actually argue points instead of insinuating. Until then, though, we should consider why such disclosure wouldn't be made and, from that, assume there to be an agenda at play, be it his own, his supervisor's, or the administration's.
In California at least, establishments with liquor licenses are required to refuse service to anyone who is drunk or appears drunk. I think that having a device which provides a definitive "they're drunk" indication would tend to reduce the amount of liquor sold in these establishments. The status quo lets them say "they don't seem/look/act drunk" and keep selling.
I worked at a Fry's for a while, and it most often seemed that people bought the service plan for [peace of mind and convenience], not because they thought they were going to come out on top monetarily somehow.
In my experience, most salespeople use FUD tactics relating to the failure rate and difficulty to receive manufacturer's service for the covered device, leading customers to buy a service plan to provide peace of mind and convenience. Most retail employers are not concerned about the use of FUD techniques, and some even train their salespeople in them.
It doesn't say they pay or get disconneced for getting a letter but for failing to respond to it.
Only for the first incident; the linked letter states the 2nd and 3rd complaints result in immediate disconnection and specified reconnection fees. The letter doesn't say what the outcome is if the student contests the 1st DMCA complaint; I'm simply assuming that on a second DMCA complaint they'll disconnect, no matter what.
Having your computer cut off from the network is not the same as being without network access.
But it is a very effective DoS attack by the RIAA against Stanford's student population. I'm concerned that it could lead to more students taking the RIAA's settlement offer instead of fighting bogus claims. Especially since Stanford's policy provides no option for the student to claim that the RIAA's complaints are completely without merit. The RIAA could simply keep resubmitting letters based on the same faulty information, causing a student to pay up to $1,600 (well, for the first three letters) to maintain their own network connection in addition to any settlement or judgment payments. Schools, unfortunately, don't have to play by the "innocent until proven guilty" rule when their students are accused of crimes; just look at the Duke University lacross team last year.
If your goal is to move into something like development, testing isn't a good place to start.
I believe testing is the right place to start, but that you should start as an intern while in college. After that experience, you'll not only understand the testing process but you'll also gain motivation to finish your degree.
In the end, if you release a product that breaks too soon, you messed something up and have a defect.
And all Macs come with a one-year warranty against manufacturing defects. Any other measure of "too soon" is just personal opinion. I expect that Apple repaired all iBooks that failed within the warranty period. Apple makes no statements on the useful life of their products beyond their warranty statement, AFAIK.
All of which is fine, if you then respond by revising either the design or the manufacturing process and fixing people's broken computers, which is not what Apple has tried to do.
Got any proof of that wild accusation? Remember, Apple contracts board manufacturing to third parties. I doubt that Apple has sit idly by and done nothing, but that doesn't mean that Apple would have been successful in anything they tried either. Sometimes technique changes (like lead-free solder) give some manufacturers headaches.
Besides, have you heard about this issue on the new MacBook or MacBook Pro systems, which have been in the market over a year now? Seems like Apple had some improvements made, then, if bad solder joints were the root cause of the iBook issues.
It should be the same for things bought over the internet, the same as if you were to travel to the state and buy the product.
Actually, it is.
No matter where an item is purchased, the purchaser owes a "use tax" payment to the state in which the item is first used. If "sales tax" has been paid on the item, the amount paid in "sales tax" is deducted from "use tax" payment which is due. When you buy an item in your state of residence, the "sales tax" and "use tax" amounts are equal, so while it was collected as a "sales tax" by the merchant, you actually DEDUCTED that amount from your "use tax" liability, resulting in no additional "use tax" payment.
When you buy something from out-of-state, there is generally no "sales tax" collected. When the "use tax" payments come due, there are no "sales tax" payment to deduct, so the entire amount of "use tax" must be paid. If you traveled out-of-state to make a purchase and the "sales tax" paid on that purchase is less than your state's "use tax", then the difference is still due to your state.
Amazing how many people mod up things that *sound* well-informed... whether they're factually correct or not.
But, as your moderation proves, accusations can get positive moderation without providing any details about the claim at all. What's factually incorrect in the GP's comment?
Timeline is July 2007 when they can't offer the integrated boxes anymore.
Actually, as of July 2007, the cable companies will not be allowed to place new integrated boxes into service; however, they can continue to re-use their existing inventory as long as they want. I suspect that Time Warner's HD DVR order is being delayed because of the orders from cable systems who have chosen to "stock up" in advance of the deadline to avoid rolling out non-integrated boxes as long as possible.
iPhone has been trademarked since 1996, before Apple had an "i" anything, how is that desperation?
Well, the InfoGear iPhone was a $299 phone that could web-surf using a dial-up ISP. Maybe you'd like a page that has a picture of the device: 7.4" black and white touchscreen with a pull-out QWERTY keyboard. Oh, and it cost $4.95 a month to use with your own ISP, or $24.95 per month with a provided ISP. Search Google for "InfoGear iPhone" for even more. This was the device for which InfoGear registered the iPhone trademark. Cisco's re-use of that trademark for such a wildly different product (a Skype phone) is desperation: trying to capitalize on the buzz around the name "iPhone" which was generated through rumors about an Apple product, not the original InfoGear iPhone. Apple simply didn't have a choice to trademark iPhone ahead of time, because (AFAIK) you must use a mark in trade (i.e., offer a product for sale) before you can file for a trademark.
Slashdot Mirror
And the warden knows that not all contraband is the same. But, still, you can't have the image that the rules aren't being enforced at all.
The gambling & porn apps will get a new EAC and move their users over; it's the hassle that they should have been planning for. Two of the apps in the article's table have multiple web presences, suggesting that some have planned for it.
For Facebook & Google, it's a PR issue. Apple may have scored points with the public for putting out this "we're protecting you against the big guys" story. It would look unseemly for Facebook or Google to directly point out the other contraband in Apple's jail -- nobody like a snitch.
But then the articles and commentary will come from people with ties to Facebook or Google, such as someone who "was the Lead Writer of Inside Facebook, ... covering everything about the social network", that "has moderated over 120 on-stage interviews" but lists only three: Edward Snowden, U,S, Senator Cory Booker, and Mark Zuckerberg.
I'm just saying, a little birdie told me...
jez9999, first of all do you know of a TV that has a USB-C port on it? I haven't seen any of those beasts yet, but it will happen someday.
Second, not all USB-C ports are the same. Some USB-C ports only support USB protocols, while others can support Thunderbolt and/or video. So you'd need video support on both sides of the connection; the computer side is likely to be common either as raw video or a USB video device, but again it's about finding the TV with the support for video over USB-C...
HDMI can't supply power, but MHL can. Mobile High-Definition Link (MHL) can (but is not required to) provide power back to the video source from the TV, and a lot of TVs already support MHL. MHL can use either a USB Micro B connector or an HDMI connector, so maybe you should be looking for a solution with an MHL-enabled TV adapter?
The big issue I see in my daily work life is that management acts as if using a third-party solution, be it proprietary or open-source, means we will receive perfect code at the beginning and never have to update it. We lock versions early in the dev cycle, but if a new version comes out mid-development there is a general distrust of changing to the new one.
And then, when the inevitable critical issue is discovered after we have release, we have no efficient plan on how to update. At least GPL solves that; when users have a pure-GPL system, they can always recompile/relink everything themselves after the big patch. But if I statically link a proprietary license library into our proprietary product, we have to step in and rebuild to get the fix out there. And the lack of preparation for this process does endanger security.
The management teams I've worked with are typically better at estimating and preparing for critical field breaks in "our" code. But that's why they like third-party, and that assumption of "perfect" that makes the future look so much better. So the bigger issue is that managers endanger secure software development.
And what about on the Democratic side? ... Their level of delusion seems a little worse than your average Trump voter.
Hammer, meet nail. It wasn't just the Trump side that was "misinformed" by Facebook; Clinton's supporters were equally in a bubble. "Fake" news did not impact only one side; it touched every single candidate. It was near propaganda levels, especially in the final week. Ad hominem was the normal response of the Clinton side; why rebut the argument when it's easier to attack the speaker. Straw man was the normal response of the Trump side; why respond to the actual argument when you can misrepresent it and have a slam-dunk rebuttal.
Maybe it's time for Facebook to realize that all their "algorithms" will be exploitable, and they should just go back to a perfect, unaltered timeline of everything a user is following. At least that way we can say it's the people choosing to be misinformed and not just a side-effect of an algorithmic choice.
Also, take advantage of internship and cooperative education opportunities while you're getting your degree. Putting your skills to use as you learn can help you refine your skills while you finish your degree.
One could argue that in order to test such a product, they must have installed OS X, which requires them to "accept" this EULA which they promptly violated by installing on a PC.
But what if they bought a Mac Pro and then replaced the guts with other components? Is the resulting computer still Apple-labeled? What if they have an Apple logo sticker that they stick on the case? Is that Apple-labeled?
In the beginning, there were a lot more ads on satellite radio. One of the two companies (I forget which) decided to focus on ad-free music channels; amazingly, the other company reduced the number of channels with ads as well. Post-merger, I'm concerned that Big Satellite (B.S.) will finally take aim at the terrestrial market. With only one satellite service type, how long until we see automobiles that come with a free B.S. receiver but the terrestrial receiver (AM/FM) costs extra? To me, though, it comes down to the apparent difference between Republican and Democratic oversight: Republicans reject regulations unless a direct fault can be seen (well, satellite competes with terrestrial, so it's not a monopoly) whereas Democrats demand regulations unless a direct fault can be guaranteed not to happen (well, they could become a monopoly, so forbid them from merging). I'm curious how much the FCC could "change" this decision in a year, should the executive branch return to Democratic hands.
Unlimited range? Try driving through West Virginia with satellite radio; you'll discover that mountains & trees are NOT friends with the service.
He could have refused to make the comments, resigned, and forced the Administration to send someone else to be their stooge. The fact that the option would have cost him his job does not mean that Powell did not have an option.
Any material created by a Representative in their official role of Representative is the property of the United States of America, and the Capuano letter (the 'source' for this article) states that they want to EXPAND the sites onto which this USA-owned material may be posted. Currently, Representatives may only post this material to pages under House.gov, but they want to allow 'outside channels' to enable functions that House.gov can't serve effectively, such as streaming video. This is no where close to the "barring any member of Congress from posting opinions on any internet site without first obtaining prior approval from the Democratic leadership" meme that the submitter (selil) introduced. In fact, the entire activity here appears (again, from the Capuano letter) to be RELAXING the rules on where content may be posted. Original article: -1, Troll.
If an SMB customer is willing to install a 3rd-party firmware on a Linksys device to get more features for less coin, I doubt that customer would have considered a Cisco product in the first place. In that case, it seems Cisco could be making a little money through the consumer hardware sale instead of no money through no hardware sale.
The rightful owner isn't "buing back" anything; the people who purchased the stolen goods may not be able to "return" their goods nor (AFAIK) can they sue the seller for selling them stolen goods. IANAL, but it seems that only the rightful owner can get restitution from the theif. That restitution may be the cash the theif received for the stolen goods, and the rightful owner can then "buy" their items back by returning the money that was paid for the stolen goods.
In the end, the rightful owner is "buying back" their property, but they're (ideally) using money recovered from the theif and not their own cash. The rightful owner could also choose to use their own money in advance of restitution from the theif, or may just use their own money because recovering from the theif would be a net loss.
Service plans for the iPhone start at $59.99/mo, which is $39.99 for the voice line and $20 for data. I added another iPhone for my wife for another $20 (data plan).
When they open up that published reserach so that it can be fully reviewed, we could actually argue points instead of insinuating. Until then, though, we should consider why such disclosure wouldn't be made and, from that, assume there to be an agenda at play, be it his own, his supervisor's, or the administration's.
In California at least, establishments with liquor licenses are required to refuse service to anyone who is drunk or appears drunk. I think that having a device which provides a definitive "they're drunk" indication would tend to reduce the amount of liquor sold in these establishments. The status quo lets them say "they don't seem/look/act drunk" and keep selling.
In my experience, most salespeople use FUD tactics relating to the failure rate and difficulty to receive manufacturer's service for the covered device, leading customers to buy a service plan to provide peace of mind and convenience. Most retail employers are not concerned about the use of FUD techniques, and some even train their salespeople in them.
Only for the first incident; the linked letter states the 2nd and 3rd complaints result in immediate disconnection and specified reconnection fees. The letter doesn't say what the outcome is if the student contests the 1st DMCA complaint; I'm simply assuming that on a second DMCA complaint they'll disconnect, no matter what.
But it is a very effective DoS attack by the RIAA against Stanford's student population. I'm concerned that it could lead to more students taking the RIAA's settlement offer instead of fighting bogus claims. Especially since Stanford's policy provides no option for the student to claim that the RIAA's complaints are completely without merit. The RIAA could simply keep resubmitting letters based on the same faulty information, causing a student to pay up to $1,600 (well, for the first three letters) to maintain their own network connection in addition to any settlement or judgment payments. Schools, unfortunately, don't have to play by the "innocent until proven guilty" rule when their students are accused of crimes; just look at the Duke University lacross team last year.
I believe testing is the right place to start, but that you should start as an intern while in college. After that experience, you'll not only understand the testing process but you'll also gain motivation to finish your degree.
And all Macs come with a one-year warranty against manufacturing defects. Any other measure of "too soon" is just personal opinion. I expect that Apple repaired all iBooks that failed within the warranty period. Apple makes no statements on the useful life of their products beyond their warranty statement, AFAIK.
All of which is fine, if you then respond by revising either the design or the manufacturing process and fixing people's broken computers, which is not what Apple has tried to do.
Got any proof of that wild accusation? Remember, Apple contracts board manufacturing to third parties. I doubt that Apple has sit idly by and done nothing, but that doesn't mean that Apple would have been successful in anything they tried either. Sometimes technique changes (like lead-free solder) give some manufacturers headaches.
Besides, have you heard about this issue on the new MacBook or MacBook Pro systems, which have been in the market over a year now? Seems like Apple had some improvements made, then, if bad solder joints were the root cause of the iBook issues.
Doesn't Sony already have the Connect store for that?
Actually, it is.
No matter where an item is purchased, the purchaser owes a "use tax" payment to the state in which the item is first used. If "sales tax" has been paid on the item, the amount paid in "sales tax" is deducted from "use tax" payment which is due. When you buy an item in your state of residence, the "sales tax" and "use tax" amounts are equal, so while it was collected as a "sales tax" by the merchant, you actually DEDUCTED that amount from your "use tax" liability, resulting in no additional "use tax" payment.
When you buy something from out-of-state, there is generally no "sales tax" collected. When the "use tax" payments come due, there are no "sales tax" payment to deduct, so the entire amount of "use tax" must be paid. If you traveled out-of-state to make a purchase and the "sales tax" paid on that purchase is less than your state's "use tax", then the difference is still due to your state.
But, as your moderation proves, accusations can get positive moderation without providing any details about the claim at all. What's factually incorrect in the GP's comment?
Actually, as of July 2007, the cable companies will not be allowed to place new integrated boxes into service; however, they can continue to re-use their existing inventory as long as they want. I suspect that Time Warner's HD DVR order is being delayed because of the orders from cable systems who have chosen to "stock up" in advance of the deadline to avoid rolling out non-integrated boxes as long as possible.
Well, the InfoGear iPhone was a $299 phone that could web-surf using a dial-up ISP. Maybe you'd like a page that has a picture of the device: 7.4" black and white touchscreen with a pull-out QWERTY keyboard. Oh, and it cost $4.95 a month to use with your own ISP, or $24.95 per month with a provided ISP. Search Google for "InfoGear iPhone" for even more. This was the device for which InfoGear registered the iPhone trademark. Cisco's re-use of that trademark for such a wildly different product (a Skype phone) is desperation: trying to capitalize on the buzz around the name "iPhone" which was generated through rumors about an Apple product, not the original InfoGear iPhone. Apple simply didn't have a choice to trademark iPhone ahead of time, because (AFAIK) you must use a mark in trade (i.e., offer a product for sale) before you can file for a trademark.